Mailing List Archive

On Tue, 28 Dec 2004, Marc Haber wrote:

> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi/exim4_4.34-4.diff?bug=262611&msg=3&att=1
>
> Can this one be applied upstream?

I think I can probably get new confs into the 4.50 release. However,
that URL mentions 4.34 and Exim is now at 4.43. It would be easier for
me if you could just send me new configuration files rather than
patches.

Regards,
Philip

--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.

On Wed, Dec 29, 2004 at 11:45:34AM +0000, Philip Hazel wrote:
> However,
> that URL mentions 4.34 and Exim is now at 4.43.

Debian users report bugs against 4.34 since that's what we currently
have in testind and unstable. 4.43 is in experimental, and the patch
in the BTS applies to 4.43 as well.

That patches don't do much besides creating new configuration files
from scratch.

Greetings
Marc

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | lose things." Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Nordisch by Nature | How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 621 72739835

On Wed, 29 Dec 2004, Marc Haber wrote:

> That patches don't do much besides creating new configuration files
> from scratch.

Not true. It patches a file called debian/patches/37_kbsd-gnu.dpatch
which is not part of the base Exim. It also patches the existing
OS/Makefile-GNU configuration as well as adding some new files.

It also patches OS/os.h-Linux which is the normal Linux configuration.
I don't think I want to change that in the base distribution at this
stage of the release cycle.

Regards,
Philip

--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.

On 2004-12-29 Philip Hazel <ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2004, Marc Haber wrote:
> > That patches don't do much besides creating new configuration files
> > from scratch.

> Not true. It patches a file called debian/patches/37_kbsd-gnu.dpatch
> which is not part of the base Exim.

Hello,
It is a patch containing just a patch.

$ wget 'http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi/exim4_4.34-4.diff?bug=262611&msg=3&att=1'
$ lsdiff exim4_4.34-4.diff\?bug\=262611\&msg\=3\&att\=1
exim4-4.34/debian/patches/37_kbsd-gnu.dpatch
$ patch 37_kbsd-gnu.dpatch < exim4_4.34-4.diff\?bug\=262611\&msg\=3\&att\=1
patching file 37_kbsd-gnu.dpatch

> It also patches the existing
> OS/Makefile-GNU configuration as well as adding some new files.

> It also patches OS/os.h-Linux which is the normal Linux configuration.
> I don't think I want to change that in the base distribution at this
> stage of the release cycle.

This is not urgent.

$ lsdiff 37_kbsd-gnu.dpatch
exim4-4.34/OS/Makefile-GNU
exim4-4.34/OS/Makefile-GNUkFreeBSD
exim4-4.34/OS/Makefile-GNUkNetBSD
exim4-4.34/OS/os.h-GNU
exim4-4.34/OS/os.h-GNUkFreeBSD
exim4-4.34/OS/os.h-GNUkNetBSD
exim4-4.34/OS/os.h-Linux

There are some bugs in there, too.
+CFLAGS ?= -O -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE

?= is probably GNU-make extension.

+EXIWHAT_MULTIKILL_ARG=exim4

This should obviously read "exim" instead of "exim4".
cu andreas
--
"See, I told you they'd listen to Reason," [SPOILER] Svfurlr fnlf,
fuhggvat qbja gur juveyvat tha.
Neal Stephenson in "Snow Crash"
http://downhill.aus.cc/

On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 11:20:12AM +0100, Andreas Metzler wrote:
> > It also patches OS/os.h-Linux which is the normal Linux configuration.
> > I don't think I want to change that in the base distribution at this
> > stage of the release cycle.
>
> This is not urgent.

It isn't. But it'd be good to apply these changes in the long term since
they help keeing both "system-specific" files in sync (they are for very
similar systems).

> $ lsdiff 37_kbsd-gnu.dpatch

Hey, didn't know lsdiff. No more grep ^+++ anymore!

--
.''`. Proudly running Debian GNU/kFreeBSD unstable/unreleased (on UFS2+S)
: :' :
`. `' http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu
`-

On Thu, 6 Jan 2005, Andreas Metzler wrote:

> There are some bugs in there, too.
> +CFLAGS ?= -O -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 -D_LARGEFILE_SOURCE
>
> ?= is probably GNU-make extension.

I guessed that. However, in the configurations for a GNU host, I assumed
that it would only ever be used by GNU make...

Ah, I see it's in the Linux patch too. Probably best not to have it
there.

> +EXIWHAT_MULTIKILL_ARG=exim4
>
> This should obviously read "exim" instead of "exim4".

I think I was absolutely right not to change the Linux configuration at
this stage. :-)

The additional configs, however, are in the current snapshot and will be
in 4.50.

Regards,
Philip

--
Philip Hazel University of Cambridge Computing Service,
ph10@cus.cam.ac.uk Cambridge, England. Phone: +44 1223 334714.